Thom: The Good, The Bad, and The Very, Very Ugly.
The Pentagon is Worst Person in the World.
The final shuttle launch:
Liberal Viewer: FOX News admits bias to attack Media Matters?
Maddow: Ninth Circuit Court bars DADT enforcement.
Young Turks: GOP voter suppression like Jim Crow laws.
White House: West Wing Week.
Independence Day:
- Obama on the 4th of July.
- Newsy: The 4th and the Founding Fathers
- White House 4th of July.
Olbermann: Will Newscorp survive the scandal?
Rep. Jim McDermott’s summer reading list.
The Last Word: FOX Murdoch’s News of the World scandal.
Pap: How the G.O.P. is trying to fool African Americans.
Thom with The Good, The Bad, and the Miasmatically Ugly.
Ann Telnaes: Republicans refuse to negotiate on debt.
Thom: Republicans have destroyed the American way.
Young Turks: Republican Senator Orrin Hatch argues that the Poor don’t pay enough taxes.
Palin Around with Crazy:
- Olbermann reads some Sarah Palin Poetry:
- Young Turks: Bristol on her stolen virginity on The View
Thom: Is Bachmann’s Christianity radical even for evangelicals?.
Mark Fiore: Trickle-down Tales.
Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA-01) on Clean energy.
The Daily Show’s best 2nd Amendment moments.
Thom with John Dean: How to get rid of Justice Thomas.
Rep. Jim McDermott’s summer reading list.
Pap: The criminal activities of Justice Thomas.
Young Turks: Slave labor for Wisconsin?
The POTUS Tweets.
Ed: Psychotalk from FOX’s David Asman accusing young Obama of gaming college system.
Oil Spill in Montana:
- Thom: Governor Brian Schweitzer (D-MT) on the river oil spill.
- Young Turks: An oil spill in Montana
What have unions ever done for us? (Via Slog.):
Ohio State Rep. Robert Mecklenborg is Worst Person in the World.
The Daily Show’s Best 14th Amendment moments.
Ann Telnaes: Sen McConnell on raising taxes.
White House: Impressions on the Twitter Town Hall.
The G.O.P. Candidate Asylum:
- Ed: Mitt doublespeak.
- Does Mitt thing nobody is paying attention to his own words?!?
- Santorum’s major math FAIL (via Slog).
- Olbermann: Santorum and Romney gaffe-fest.
- Ed: Psycho-ignorance from Rick Santorum.
- Bachmann hopes high unemployment will help her campaign (via Crooks and Liars).
- Ed: Michele & Marcus Bachmann’s record of intolerance, homophobioa and bigotry:
- Young Turks: Santorum’s very bad math.
- Ed: Allentown Mayor blasts the Mittster.
- Maddow: The crazies vs. the Rombots.
- Young Turks: Michele Bachmann on women being submissive to their husband.
- Last Word: The Right-wing anti-porn pledge.
- Maddow: Klansman David Duke to run for President as a Republican and other strange G.O.P. tales
Ed with some Sen. Orrin Hatch (R) psychotalk.
Young Turks: Michele Bachmann’s anti-Porn vow.
Thom: Republicans ran up the bill…now they don’t want to pay.
Some airline employee is Worst Person in the World.
Last week’s Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza can be found here.
It’s 1:30AM on a Friday evening/Saturday morning, and I’m about 1/3 of the way through a bottle of French brandy ($13.45 at your local state liquor store), so I’m halfway pasted … and eating a can of Garbanzo beans … which makes this a good time to write about ECONOMICS before I start farting. Fucking economics!
Look, I know most of you have already gone to bed and won’t read this until Saturday morning, so let me launch your weekend with this. Despite being a rabbit and having paws instead of fingers, I’m something of a cartoonist. As I can’t post graphics here, I’ll have to describe my cartoon. (I drew this one about 25 years ago and it got rave reviews at the office where I worked at the time.)
Two guys are sitting on barstools. The clock on the wall says 10 AM. Nobody else is in the bar. (Cripes, who the hell goes to a bar at 10-fucking-ay-em, except the chronic drunks?) One of the barflies says to the other (the punchline is everything in the cartoon business):
“I prefer to think of this as drinking after midnight rather than drinking before noon.”
Well, at least those fuckers are educated and have some decent diction! Now to the economics.
I’m a regular reader — along with Bill Gates Jr. and Warren Buffett — of The Economist, a U.K.-based business-oriented conservative news/opinion magazine which, like any intelligently-run foreign publication, puts out a U.S. edition (and also an online edition). A guest contributor who signed his byline only as “R.A.” posted the following opinion piece:
http://www.economist.com/blogs.....recovery-0
Now, I really think you should read this, regardless of whether you’re a Republican or Democrat, although idiots need not apply (they won’t understand what R.A. is saying).
I have no idea who R.A. is, but s/he seems to know what s/he is talking about, and seems to have some pretty canny insights, so I suspect R.A. is an insider. Either a honcho at the Fed Reserve or some high-ranking administration policymaker. Whatever, R.A. doesn’t want us to know who s/he is, obviously because of potential work complications, so we’ll just have to assume s/he is somebody important. This article reads like it was written by S.I. (somebody important), so it probably was.
R.A. starts out by stating the obvious: “There’s no real mystery behind the slow improvement in employment; it flows directly from the lacklustre growth in the economy.”
That inarguably falls into the “no shit, Sherlock!” category. (Man, it sure helps to be half-drunk when posting a comment like this one!)
Okay, so now we know why everybody is unemployed, and can segui into the subleties of MONETARY POLICY, always a fascinating subject, especially to those who want to understand why their hard-earned dollars keep buying less and less at the grocery store. (The 50-cent TV dinners I subsist on just shrank for 9.0 oz. to 7.5 oz., a 17% overnight price increase — and they tell us there’s no inflation?!)
“The Fed’s projected growth rates,” R.A. says, “are for real GDP expansion. And it’s possible that slow real output growth is entirely due to real factors.”
Are you following this? Do I need to explain what “real” means when economists use the term? I hope not — I’m not in the mood, and it’s questionable whether I’m in any shape to after imbibing 1/3 bottle of brandy.
R.A. continues, “It could be the case that if the Fed attempted to push the economy to go any faster, accelerating inflation would result. The Fed doesn’t actually seem to believe this … if it had believed that inflation were running out of control it would have curtailed [QE2]. It didn’t.”
Yeah, well, we’ve all known for some time that Bernanke thinks there’s no inflation because he’s been telling us so; the fucker probably dines in an executive lunchroom where he never sees the tab (it goes straight to the taxpayers) and therefore has no fucking idea of what’s going on in real (that word again!) grocery stores, the kind patronized by us proles.
R.A. goes on, “the Fed can’t control real factors, but it can control nominal ones. And right now, it appears that nominal output growth in 2011 will fall short of the economy’s long-term trend. Not short of the growth rate consistent with a speedy recovery; short of trend. Now, if you operate an economy below trend for long periods of time, disinflation is sure to become a problem. And indeed, at no point does the Fed project that core inflation will rise above 2%. Meanwhile, medium- and long-term inflation expectations have fallen for two consecutive months.”
Did you get that? If you did, maybe you can explain that gobbledygook to me, because I’m curious to know what the fuck the guy is saying. Continuing on,
“I don’t expect the Fed to work miracles. There are lots of economic problems Ben Bernanke can’t solve. I do expect the Fed to do its job, and right now it looks like the Fed is saying it has no responsibility for meeting its nominal goals. That’s not acceptable.”
Where is this going? R.A. seems to be arguing we need a QE2.25. Not a QE3, mind you, just a Quantitative Easing Two And One Quarter.
R.A. then shifts to Obama’s release of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which he calls “a canny move” to fuck with speculators, who by definition are bad guys. R.A. does a little speculating himself by saying “its possible the move will change the prevailing expectations of the path of oil prices from rising to flat.” Did you get that? This is important. Really. But then R.A. sabotages his praise for Obama’s acumen by stating “over the long term, high market prices are a crucial part of the process of structural demand reduction.” In case you have no fucking idea what that means, it refers to scaring the shit out of commuters with $5 gas so they’ll trade in their gas guzzlers for Miser Mobiles, to create a permanent lower demand for oil products. This tactic also helps Boeing sell its new airplane models to airlines who can’t afford to keep flying their old kerosene guzzlers.
So, what does this all add up to? You’ll have your own take on it, but my position is basically unchanged, even though I’ve now consumed half the brandy bottle and can no longer be held responsible for what I write, to wit: I think the Federal Reserve was full of shit when it inflicted QE2 on us, and anyone over the age of 62 knows damn well that Bernanke’s assertions that there’s no inflation is nothing more or less than a sinister government plot to balance the federal budget on the backs of senior citizens (you know, the people who subsist on dog food because they can’t afford food made for human consumption) by gaming the CPI numbers so the Social Security Administration doesn’t have to cough up our COLAs. What a bunch of low-life highwaymen these guys are … !
If you’re interested in macroeconomic things, you might want to read this article too:
http://www.economist.com/node/18834323
It’s a little dense, but basically, it says Republicans are full of shit and electing another GOP administration before we’re out of the hole the last GOP administration pushed us into would be a fucking disaster.
This item is quoted from the article linked A2:
“Some Republican senators cited QE2 as a reason for blocking Mr Obama’s nomination of Peter Diamond, a Nobel prize-winning economist, to the Fed. (An uncited reason was revenge for Democrats’ blocking of Mr Bush’s nominees.)”
The reason I’m calling it to your attention is because it demonstrations that U.S. politics have degenerated to the level of Afghan tribal rivalries, thanks to the fucking Republicans.
In other words, to hell with sane fiscal or monetary policy, the only priority in D.C. is badal, the Afghan custom of exacting revenge for actual or perceived insults.
And here’s the argument that housing, yes HOUSING, could lead the economy back to normality.
http://www.economist.com/blogs.....-markets-0
I don’t know if you know this, but rents are going up because rental vacancies are tightening, because all the people who vacated the millions of houses now in foreclosure still have to live somewhere, right?
Really, have you noticed more people sleeping under bridges? I haven’t. Despite Republicans’ best efforts to reintroduce Hooverism and replicate the social conditions of the 1930s, the displacement of people from abandoned single-family housing units has been to rental units, not cardboard shacks or brushy hillsides under elevated freeways.
In other words, Republicans have failed in their mission of inflicting another Great Depression on the productive class of Americans, the people who work for a living, and actually make things, as opposed to those who stand around and watch them (loosely called “supervising”) or spend Wednesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays on the golf course allegedly for the purpose of drumming up business to keep the workers busy.
And that’s sort of fortunate for the rest of us, and especially for the illegals, because it means there may be construction work for the Hispanics again, in the not-too-distant future.
You might want to take a quick glance at this article, too, entitled “Angst in the United States: What’s wrong with America’s economy?” The salient comment there is:
“In a new New York Times/CBS News poll, seven out of ten respondents said America is on the wrong track. Almost 60% of Americans disapprove of Barack Obama’s handling of the economy, and three out of four think Congress is doing a lousy job.”
Interpretation: Only 40% of Americans think President Obama is doing a good job with the economy, but only 25% of Americans think Congress knows what it’s doing with the economy, therefore Obama is right and the Republicans who control the House are wrong. Or, at least, the voters are going to re-elect Obama and bounce the GOPers out of the House.
http://www.economist.com/node/18620710
Of course, there’s nothing new about the observation that GOPers are economic illiterates. I mean, 1929, Hoover, gold standard — get my drift? Those fuckers haven’t learned anything from history. That’s because none of them went to college, or if they did, they slept through the lectures.
Holy shit! This thread has been up only since midnight, and it already has seven (7) — count ’em, SEVEN!!! — comments, which is more than Stefan’s sucky little blog gets in a fuckng WEEK. Hey man, HA rocks! If you’re still reading Sucky Politics, you’re wasting your time, all the action is on HA.
Besides, Stefan got a single-mom waitress fired from her job for shushing Stefan’s rowdy kid in a crowded restaurant, so why would you patronize his pathetic little blog anyway? Not to mention that Stefan ripped off $225,000 from King County taxpayers by abusing the penalty provisions of the Public Records Act. That guy is an asshole from head-to-toe, so why would anyone read his blog?
Bachmann and her husband are indeed radically wacky.
Bachmann’s husband’s “practice” for which he received hundreds of thousands of dollars in medicaid payments, is “counseling” gays (i.e., praying away teh gay).
So, I’m amazed that no one’s pointed this out since it’s so painfully obvious if you’ve paid the least bit of attention to his public statements and mannerisms:
Bachmann’s husband is one missed prayer away from being a cock sucking “barbarian”.
It falls right in with the 23 kids (compensation) and a lot of other stuff.
They’re a dime-a-dozen: Another closeted, compensating gay Republican and his “beard”, except the beard has a good chance of being the R nominee for POTUS.
So it won’t surprise me a bit when one or more of Dr. Bachmann’s “clients” goes public.
Any of your other heterosexuals thinking of killing your children, it’s an epidemic.
@ RR
This is not strictly true. While the majority of GOP supporters never attended University and in all likelihood slept through the basic civics courses in High School, all the top dogs in the party did.
Politicians are mostly lawyers, not the sort of lawyer that goes into the profession for altruistic reasons, not for a love of Justice or even the science of law, but to make money. And as everyone already knows, when you inject the love of money and power into anything (two aspects of Government that feed off each other and are mutually beneficial to each other) it creates corruption and the incentive to create the socioeconomic conditions that enable money to buy justice, to buy laws that benefit the highest bidders rather than the needs of the greater social construct that is a nation.
Conservative politicians tend to gravitate toward the most lucrative aspect of politics. This is why you have people in the GOP saying flat out that “unprofitable” laws should be a lower enforcement priority than profitable ones, IE: the drug laws which can always be used to generate revenue for the State, instill negative emotional reactions into a population, and cash flow for private interests with business in the industry, even if that cash flow is detrimental to the society.
So while the majority of Conservatives tend to be an uneducated, intolerant and bigoted lot, the majority of Conservative Politicians tend to be very well educated in how to manipulate the publics perceptions of the need for societal regulation and therefore the resultant legal framework.
This is the very definition of Corruption. We don’t need no steenkin justice, only cash flow. James Stockton said this flat out during the Reagan campaign in 84. That the Government needs to be more business friendly, and the marriage of Government and Business is a top priority of the Reagan Administration. Justice is not a matter of right and wrong, but of force. When that force is directed at creating cash flow for private interests over Justice, you have what you have now. A wholly corrupted, unmanageable system of interlocked and self-supported corruption.
So much for the Constitution.
Sort of wondering if Lee is still feeling upbeat about his unwavering support of Obama’s Libyan Grand Adventure. Especially considering how the critics’ predictions of mission creep and quagmire and oil motives prove true and Lee’s claims of it only being a short-term humanitarian good guy Boy Scout deed prove to be vapor.
RR @ 9
Leave other people’s kids out of it.
Uhh… Mere support for European allies designs with some political cover from the Arab League..
Who needed another Rawanda from a guy sitting on top of so much oil?
The only downside was that the opposition to Muammar withing Libya was so disorganized and diffuse.
We should go ahead and re-elect Obama in 2012 because Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton will never let us hear the end of it. They’re be screaming about racism until the cows come home. It’s just easier to re-elect the Obama-dude than putting-up with all that shit from the loud-mouth morons like Jackson and Sharpton.
What the fuck is this dodo talking about?
The McCupcake video has been posted, with comments from Goldy!
http://slog.thestranger.com/sl.....-afraid-of
What a McSourpuss!
@16,
It’s pretty self-expanatory: we should re-elect Obama in 2012.
@18,
That should read “self-explanatory.” Typo.
Short of the feces dribble from Puddydope, the asshat troll and rich people first – this has got to be the most stupid thing I’ve read in a while.
We should re-elect Obama because no one has bothered to step up to the plate from his own party to primary him and as far as I can see he is way better than the degenerate alternative from the right.
@12 Considering that Gadhafi’s battered forces are on the run and anti-Gadhafi rebels are closing in on Tripoli and Gadhafi’s days appear numbered, I’d say Obama was right.
@13 ?? I didn’t post #9.
@13 (continued) Are you referring to the spammer @10?
@18 We don’t have much choice, do we?
@17 Um, don’t GOPers also have trackers who tape Democratic pols at campaign events? So, if they can do it, why can’t Dems do it?
Republicans want a monopoly on every fucking thing.
@26
well you certainly have the monopoly on senile.
Remember when Republicans told us the War On Terror would last 100 years? Well, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetti says Al Qaeda is crippled and on the verge of defeat. Oh, I won’t say the Bushies made no progress in the fight against these terrorists; they did, after all, close down their Afghanistan training bases and take out a few minor functionaries. But President Obama has already accomplished more in the fight against A.Q. in his 2 1/2 years in office than Bush’s staged carrier landing and “Mission Accomplished” banner did in 8 years. And, folks, remember we’e in a war and in wartime it’s never wise to change horses in midstream — any grizzled old cavalryman can tell you that. Personally, I’ve long suspected this 100-year war thing was just a ruse by the GOPers to keep the crony contracts flowing to their buddies. But it’s possible that Bush, knowing his own limitations, really did believe that a Republican administration couldn’t defeat A.Q. in less than a hundred years — or a thousand, or a million. Which may be why the voters hired a Democrat to do it.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43.....-security/
@27 > yawn <
Even Coulter's murder jokes are funnier than that.
and because Panetta says it, you believe it.
dupe.
Hmmm. This dope gave Panetta a lot of credibility.
Not that he could comprehend what Panetta said worth a damn.
One of yours,
dope.
@25: It’s hilarious! One member of the group makes a point of drawing attention for viewers to how politely they are calling the cops and demanding Wurtz’s name and birthdate. What a bunch of total wusses!
@30
strawman much?
and we get to see how YLBleeders mind operates.
“he’s one of yours”…this isnt a team sport dildo breath. mindsets like yours with the “us vs them” mentality are exactly why this country is fucked.
good job lemming boy.
you and rujaxoff related?
32 – Heh. Strawman? Try the feces men you build every time you freaking come here.
Oh it is a team sport moron. You’re on the team of right wing bullshit and name call the ones you live to hate. My friends and I are on the team that laughs at your antics.
We didn’t ask for it. We’d rather bring up facts and point to solutions to problems.
You’d rather clap when there’s something Dori or some other right wing idiot spouts off and come here to call names.
Keep trying to lie and hide what your’re about.
You’re not fooling anybody.
I heard an economist say on the radio that the terrible job numbers over the last two months had a no-brainer cause..
Price of oil over $100 per barrel.
Sorry kids, there’s no way around it. If we don’t have cheap access to oil, we don’t have economic growth. When we don’t have economic growth we don’t have jobs and debts get harder and harder to pay down.
And with all the old supergiant oil fields producing less and less the situation is only going to get worse and worse.
When the price of oil gets too high, the price of food gets too high and when people can’t eat, they riot. So look for more unrest, more terrorism, more whacked out right wing politics blaming the whole mess on made up bullshit that scared people will swallow.
Yes there’s a host of solutions to the energy problem, even solutions that keep environmental degradation to a minimum, but there’s a huge pile of money that undermine any progress (oops there’s that word) because the status quo is quite acceptable to a very heeled elite.
OMG it’s a war on cars!
‘Bout fucking time if you ask me.
@25
Yep, they sure do.
@23 RR – I think the idiot was referring to your post #8 not #9. I didn’t talk about any ones children, other than heterosexuals seem to be killing all their children, it is becoming a National past time event.
@37 So is your argument that homosexuals are more peaceful, and if everyone was gay, we would have a peaceful world?
Here’s an interesting column from the Everett Herald that’s generally positive about unions, but then takes issue with the tendency of police unions to defend police misconduct. I’m not taking a position here — yet — just throwing this out for discussion.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43.....verett_wa/
Who’s To Blame For Looming Federal Default?
It looks like we’re headed for a debt ceiling meltdown. Just as I’ve been saying for months, Republicans are pushing us into a first-ever Treasury default. Economic experts predict the consequences will be serious, if not severe.
I don’t think there’s any doubt it’s the Republicans who are at fault and should get the blame. Their demands are outrageous — they want to cut Social Security and Medicare in order to preserve tax breaks for the ultra-rich, at a time when both federal revenues (as a percentage of GDP) and tax rates on the wealthy are at a post-World War 2 low.
Republicans also are demonstrating, once again, their capacity for brazen hypocrisy. Throughout the deficit debate, they’ve thumped their chests and told the public that federal spending is too high, that we must shrink deficits no matter what (even though we all know who created those deficits in the first place). But now, they’re holding out for a deficit reduction package only half the size of the one proposed by President Obama, in order to avoid taxing the rich.
It’s pretty damned clear where their priorities lie, and that talk about cutting deficits is just that — talk — a mere political tool for getting what they really want, which is a society in which the wealthy property-owning class pays no taxes and the working class has no safety net.
Shame on these moral morons. If Jesus was around today he’d be kicking over their currency-trading tables and expelling them from any building with a cross on top of it.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43.....ite_house/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43.....ite_house/
@38….you got it…but not I’m not advocating that everyone be a homosexual, I’m not that stupid, and I realize that homosexuals aren’t all law abiding individuals, but how many gay gangs have you heard about that are going around killing each other and locked up in prison? Just trying to point out that heterosexuals have faults too, like being more violent individuals, they seem to kill their children and spouses like there is no tomorrow.
@38 gay people are too busy making plans on how to get to a gay pride parade than killing something with a gun or bow and arrow – not to say that you will not find that one gay guy that likes to hunt too. But heterosexuals love killing things, people or animals.
@38 – I know, I know – Jeffrey Dalhmer and John Wayne Gacey. But what happen in Wyoming the other day, some guy kills his three sons and another man and tries to kill his wife. Please give me that one, once in a while, example where this happens with a gay couple. FBI statistic – 300 children are killed annually by their parents. Is this acceptable? Is there something that should be learned here? I’m not suggesting that it would never happen with gay people, but it sure seems to me like it is less of an occurrence, or should be more of an occurrence to compete equally with heterosexuals. When is the next one going to occur with heterosexuals, probably tomorrow.
@41 “they seem to kill their children and spouses like there is no tomorrow”
This really isn’t that big of a problem, because the planet still ends up with more people than ever before. And even if this tendency did deplete the human population, that wouldn’t be a problem in itself, because when all the people are gone there will be plenty of rabbits to take their place.
@43 “Please give me that one, once in a while, example where this happens with a gay couple.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....riage.html
At last month’s Paris Air Show, airlines ordered 730 new airplanes from Airbus and only 142 new airplanes from Boeing.
http://www.economist.com/node/18926285
@ 45 – Next. How about naming one in this country, the FBI statistic of 300 children is just in this Country. Again, where are all the gangs of gay men killing people. You speak of one example for a World’s population – you would have been better off if you cited some other gay serial killer other than Jeffrey Dahlmer or John Wayne Gacey, which there are plenty off…..but I’m talking about everyday people, here in the US. And the example you give goes back to may 2010 – how many straight murders took place since then?
Who is more prone to violence – Men or Woman? Or do woman kill as much as men kill? Do woman rape men at the rate men rape woman (I know there might be difference due to physical strength, but woman rape men if they could physically do it?).
@47 You asked for one, you got it, now kwitherbellyachen.
@44 – whether or not it is a problem, that doesn’t change my argument. So you are for people murdering each other as a way of control of population but want to use homosexuality as being bad because it doesn’t contribute towards the continuation of civilization -not you per say, but others have commented about homosexuality not being normal because it doesn’t contribute towards the continuation of offspring. But two gay rabbits can still have sex (a homo boy and dike girl can still get it on to produce a child). I know this is getting off topic of my main argument, that is not my intention…..heterosexuals are violent individuals is the main argument.
Why GOP Stonewallers Are Wrong
“To non-partisans, the idea of taming the deficit by spending cuts alone flies against both common sense and arithmetic. America’s tax-take is not high either by international or its own historical standards. One commission after another has advocated mixing spending reductions and revenue increases. Without the latter, entitlement programmes will have to be eviscerated, even if, as now looks possible, the defence budget takes a share of the pain. But the Republicans will not budge from their dogma.”
http://www.economist.com/node/18897489
Roger Rabbit Commentary: So what does it mean? It means there’s probably going to be a Treasury default, because President Obama simply can’t give in to the GOP’s irrational demands, and GOPers can’t back off those demands without betraying their Teaparty supporters. So, I’m selling stocks to stock up on cash (while the getting is good) so I can relieve rich (but cash-short) Republicans of their shares for pennies on the dollar after their stupid and greedy Republican buddies succeed in crashing the financial markets (again). Man, this insanity is as predictable as winter rains in Seattle, and makes making money by speculating* in stocks easy!!!
* Even I wouldn’t dignify what I do by calling it “investing.” I’m a flipper, pure and simple.
@48 – and I told you, you would probably find one, but one! Or even two or three, but nowhere near equal in proportionality to heterosexuals.
If I provided a link to every straight murder or rape, Goldy would have to get a new server.
Even the conservative editors of The Economist, a business-friendly U.K.-based news/opinion magazine, thinks the GOPers are nuts:
” … Republicans are pushing things too far. Talks with the administration ground to a halt last month, despite an offer from the Democrats to cut at least $2 trillion … out of the budget over the next ten years … that would be enough to get the deficit back to a prudent level. …
“The sticking-point is not on the spending side. It is because the vast majority of Republicans, driven on by the wilder-eyed members of their party and the cacophony of conservative media, are clinging to the position that not a single cent of deficit reduction must come from a higher tax take. This is economically illiterate and disgracefully cynical.”
http://www.economist.com/node/18928600
@50 – I only dabble in the stock market, but I moved all my money into the stable (bond market) fund in my 401k two months ago. I hope my money is safe.
@53 – who is more stupid the GOP pushing to hard or the Republican constituents that believe in these guys. I hope they all get what they wish for – no more medicare, social security, a ruined economy and no investment in the future.
You know this just a big game to them, they want to get re-elected in Nov. 2012, then they will change their tune and spend like crazy to get the economy going again, then pretend to be the heroes, like it was some type of magic on their part.
All I need right now is to see interest rates go through the roof when the Treasury defaults.
Thanks degenerate right wing idiots.
I hope that’s very short term treasury bonds.
If not and the Republicans get their way (the government defaults) – you did just about the worst possible thing.
Like the Rabbit – you should be in cash right now.
57 – Short term Treasury BILLS to be more precise.
@54 Nothing is safe.
@57 – I only have a few choices, I can’t move my 401k money into cash. I can only hope for the best.
I’d love to get some advice from RR – like I said not sure what I can do with 401k, I only have limited choices. I’ve been in the stable fund for the past 10 years, only realizing small gains, but gains none the less, I never lost a penny due to the past market drops. Not sure this time I’ll be able to say the same thing. I got quite a bit in there, I’d hate to see it disappear. But heck if it comes to that for me, I’ll be in good company, company that I avoided last time(s).
@ 1
“I have no idea who R.A. is…”
At The Economist, R.A. would be Ryan Avent.
What the Deficit Fight Is Really About
Republicans want to cut the social security and medicare benefits of people who worked all their lives so CEOs can keep their historically low tax rates.
It’s as simple as that.
And if Obama gives in to this, he shouldn’t get a single Democratic vote next year. He should call the GOPers’ bluff and see if they really want to destroy their own wealth by plunging the government into default and the financial markets into chaos.
@61 There’s not much you can do with a 401(k) except research the performance of the mutual fund choices available to you, then direct your 401(k) funds into the least-worst of them, and hope for the best.
My advice to you, and anyone else, goes something like this:
1. Stop listening to the brainwashing of our commercialized culture, get rid of the ego that needs status symbols, and downsize your lifestyle to the things that really matter.
2. As an aid to determining what really matters, memorize this ditty and refer to it often: “Most Americans work at jobs they hate to earn money they don’t need to buy things they don’t want to impress people they don’t like,” and then reorder your priorities accordingly.
3. An intelligent list of priorities looks something like this: (a) Providing yourself and your loved ones with life’s essentials, including food, shelter, clothing, medical care, and a good education; (b) getting out of debt and, once you’re out of debt, permanently staying out of debt; (c) becoming a member of the owning class by accumulating the surplus of your income not needed for items listed in (a) and rationally investing it.
4. With regard to investing rationally, over the last 200 years stocks have consistently outperformed all other types of investments by a wide margin, so why would a rational investor put his money in anything besides stocks?
5. The best way to make money in stocks is not to trying finding stocks that will triple in a year, but by buying stocks that provide total returns (capital gains + dividends) of 10% to 20% a year and reinvesting those gains in order to compound such returns.
6. Plan your work and financial life so you’ll never have to spend your savings. If this proves to be impossible, take comfort in knowing that you have a nest egg of savings.
7. Raise your kids with the values, character, and financial acumen that guarantees they won’t squander the inheritance you spent a lifetime amassing so that they would never have to struggle like you did.
Someone needs to shove a dick in gmans mouth.
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpoi.....hp?ref=fpa
Your corporate overlords living it up at your expense.
Welcome to Republikanistan.
@61 (continued) If you want something more specific, I have always invested my IRA funds in individual stocks. Well, not always, many years ago I tried a few mutual funds but I quickly learned the only people who make money from mutual funds are fund managers; given that 80% of mutual funds underperform the market, and even a donkey can get an average return by kicking darts at a newspaper page of stock listings, why would any sane person buy mutual funds?
As you may know, the late Pop Rabbit (who was almost 100 years old) went up a couple months ago, and family members are still finding annuities and life insurance policies tucked away in the crannies of his dusty rolltop desk. It now appears Pop Rabbit left over a million dollars to his bunnies, which isn’t bad at all for a newspaper reporter who was paid $25 a week, but that’s not quite as good for me as it sounds because he had a lot of bunnies. Nevertheless, I’m gonna get a low-six-figure chunk of change in coming months so I’ve been spent quite a big of time recently figuring out how to invest it.
Inasmuch as I’ve been investing as a serious hobby for over 25 years now, I’d like to think I’m pretty well dialed in to the economy and market (even if it isn’t true), so humor me here. All I know is what I read, and I read stuff published by people who are paid a lot of money to find out what’s going out, in other words the cream of the financial press corps and the outspoken pundits of the financial world.
It’s actually kind of easy right now, because all of these people agree on what’s happening. The sluggish recovery and persistent high unemployment aren’t at all surprising because this recovery is following the classic pattern of past recoveries that have followed financial crashes. Corporations have been racking up spectacular profits but most of that came from one-time productivity gains from layoff off workers during the Great Recession and making those still employed work much harder; everyone agrees the profit growth of 2009 and 2010 isn’t sustainable which means investors can’t expect continuing robust profits to keep driving stocks higher. Stocks are probably going to level off or grow at a slower pace from here going forward.
Everyone else agrees that small-cap growth stocks have had a great run and are overvalued now, and the only reasonable place to put new money into the market is dividend-paying blue-chip stocks, many of which are still valued at P/Es below the historic average. In other words, blue-chip dividend payers are undervalued.
In trying to figure out how to invest about $150,000, I came up with a list of such stocks that, combined, will provide an overall portfolio yield above 4% — plus you’ll get steady dividend growth and modest (but compounding) capital gains. I’m shooting for a total return (dividends + share price increases) of 10% to 15% over the next several years, and that appears attainable at today’s market valuations.
Generally speaking, I’m looking for stocks that yield at least 3% and have a reliable track record of raising their dividends every year. I’m also looking for a number of things that tell me the stock is reasonably safe and will keep going up in value; investors refer to this process as “screening” and I won’t go into the details here, let’s just say I’ve already done that work for you.
Okay, ready? Here we go.
McDonald’s (the hamburger chain) belongs in every retirement-oriented investor’s portfolio. It’s an expensive stock, yielding only 2.9%, but this company hasn’t missed an annual dividend increase since the Stone Age and the dividends increase fast enough that you’ll more than get back the premium you have to pay for this stock. MCD is universally considered the King of Dividend Stocks and it’ll deliver the goods for you, year after year.
For a retirement portfolio I like boring stocks of boring companies that make money in good or bad economies. There are a number of such stocks in the food and beverage sector, most of them yielding between 2.5% and 3.5%. Of the beverage stocks, forget the exotic stuff and go for the biggies; the only two you really need to own are Coca-Cola (KO) and Pepsi (PEP), both of them expensive stocks and you don’t need to own both, between them I would choose KO. In the food sector, I like Heinz (HNZ) and Campbell Soups (CPB), both yielding 3.4% at current share prices.
A related and similar category is household products. In this category I like Kimberly Clark (KMB, 4.2%), makers of Kleenex and Huggies, and Procter & Gamble (PG, 3.0%), and maybe a smaller position in Avon Produts (AVP, 3.2%).
In the retail grocery sector, I like Flowers Foods (FLO, 4.0%).
Generally speaking, the highest yields (except for REITs and Limited Partnerships, which I would avoid) are in telecom and tobacco stocks. Among the telecoms, the best stock is Verizon (VZ, 5.2%); AT&T (T, 5.5%) doesn’t have quite as strong a market position and is a bit riskier, but I would have a nearly equal position in that stock as well, and I might own a smaller position in Vodafone (VOD, 5.2%) just to diversify my telecom holdings, which might make up 15% of my porfolio.
I’ll probably also have a hefty position in pharmaceuticals. This is a tricky sector, where knowing which stocks to own and which to avoid is crucial, and it’s more complicated than I can explain here so you’ll just have to take my word for it that the best stocks to buy in this sector are Johnson & Johnson (JNJ, 3.4%), Merck (MRK, 4.2%), and Novartis (NVS, 3.5%). Merck hasn’t raised its dividend in several years but that’s going to change. With all these drug stocks, I have a 10-year horizon, meaning you’re not going to see results 6 months from now; these are long-long-term investments — get ’em now while they’re cheap. Drug stocks to avoid include Eli Lilly and Bristol Myers Squibb; I wouldn’t touch these even in a hazmat suit.
There’s not a whole lot in the tech sector that I would buy for a retirement portfolio, but Intel (INTC, 3.6%) looks very cheap right now and is a reliable dividend payer — I didn’t wait on that one, I’ve already bought it for my IRA. I’m a bit equivocal about Microsoft, which has been a dead stock for a decade now, but there’s a colorable argument that its death has been exaggerated and it will reward people who buy it at today’s price — I’d probably feel comfortable with a modest position in it, if I’m taking a long-term 5 years or more) view.
Tobacco is a dirty business and a non-expanding one, most of the growth here is in the Third World, but a modest position in Altria (MO, 5.7%) can be used to juice the dividend income of an income-oriented portfolio and Philip Morris (PM, 3.7%) is the other stock I like (from a purely mercenary investing point of view) in the tobacco sector.
In the past, bank and utility stocks were the mainstay of income investors’ portfolios, but banks obviously have imploded (and I wouldn’t touch them even at today’s firesale prices), and putting a lot of money in utility stocks is bad idea right now for the same reason that owning bonds is a real bad idea right now — yields are low and risks are high. When today’s artificially low interests return to more normal levels, bond and utility stock prices will go down in sync — the prices of these securities always moves in tandem with, and opposite to, interest rates. I wouldn’t put more than 5% of a long-term retirement portfolio into utility stocks, and my two choices here are Avista (AVA, 4.2%) and Unisource Energy (UNS, 4.4%).
I’ve always owned energy stocks and probably always will. Oil is the most profitable business in the history of the universe. Nowadays, though, most oil reserves have been taken over by governments and the oil majors are mainly service businesses that get paid a fee to extract the stuff. I’ve generally done much better with oilfield services stocks, but these are pricey right now. So, for that matter, are the integrated companies. I happen to own Chevron, the best of the majors, in my IRA but I bought it $30 ago, and it’s expensive (and low-yielding) at today’s price and in fact I’ve already sold a third of my Chevron shares. I do think crude prices, and therefore oil-related stocks, will continue going up through 2012 but if I were buying energy stocks today to hold for a long time in a retirement portfolio, my choices would be British Petroleum (BP), which has resumed paying a dividend (3.8%) and Total (TOT, 5.7%). I would avoid refining stocks (e.g., Valero) because there’s damned little profit in refining, and there’s nothing I like in coal, natural gas, drilling, or mining equipment right now (because all those stocks have gotten too expensive).
In Aerospace & Defense, I own Boeing in my IRA (but bought it below 70), but my choices today would be Lockheed Martin (LMT, 3.7%) and Raytheon (RTN, 3.5%); I would underweight Raytheon because it’s not quite as good, using it to diversify my A & D holdings so I don’t have all my money in one stock. Lockheed makes airplanes and Raytheon makes aviation electronics and guidance systems, so they complement each other, but I probably would own these two stocks in about a 3:2 proportion with more money in LMT.
In general retail, my choices would be Lowe’s and Wal-Mart, but I’m not real enthusiastic about retail right now because it’s going to be a long time before consumers are able to spend again.
This is by no means a complete list, but the universe of stocks that (a) pay above 3% and (b) reliably raise their dividends is pretty small, and the universe of stocks suitable for a long-term retirement portfolio also is fairly small. You have quite a bit more selection if you’re willing to drop down into the 2% to 2.5% yield range. In general, you’re looking for well-managed companies with strong market positions that have a track record of steadily growing their sales, earnings, and dividends — and which are reasonably priced. None of them are available at bargain prices, as they were in early 2009, but you can build a decent retirement portfolio today without overpaying in terms of historical price norms.
As far as whether to buy stocks now or sit on a cash hoard for a while, trying to “time” the market or individual stocks is a fool’s errand, but I’ve been trying to accumulate cash because I think the market has been overly optimistic lately and I expect to see some weakness over the next 6 months that will present better buying opportunities than exist right now. So, I would sit a little while, but not all the way into next year.
Well RR may be right again.. If the treasury defaults there may be, scratch that, there WILL be a panic and a run on the dollar. The central banks however will intervene to keep the dollar halfway stable I’m thinking.
I read just the other day that almost ALL of QE2 went into Eurodollar deposits. Foreign banks are allowed to be part of the 20 primary treasury bond dealers. Wow. And foreign banks most likely won the silent bid process. Why?
Maybe they didn’t want the U.S. to benefit from QE2 because it would be at their expense.
The article I read also said that QE2 was more or less unnecessary – U.S. already had one trillion in IDLE reserves – they hardly needed 600 billion more. Basically – they don’t want to lend to the average joe. The inflation risk of a booming economy doesn’t bode well for their interests which is now just be a vampire – suck on their hosts (you and me) until we’re almost dead – watch them revive a bit and suck some more.
So screw ’em. They have to be end runned. The State Bank of North Dakota is a good model. North Dakota by the way is doing better than any state in the union right now and having its own bank whose profits go straight into the general fund has a lot to do with ND’s prosperity. Partnership Banks legislation is pending in all the Western States to free up capital for small business.
Support those bills. The stranglehold of Wall Street and the big banks has to be broken otherwise we’re asking the big sharks to swallow all us little fish.
@68 North Dakota is doing well because it has a lot of formerly inaccessible oil that is now econmically feasible to pump thanks to new extraction technologies coupled with $100+ crude prices.
As for treasury default, I’ve been saying all along that congressional Republicans are lunatics and will pull the default trigger; and it increasingly looks like I will end up having called that one right.
@65 keep your fantasies to yourself.
Thanks Roger – sounds like a lot if good advice. I didn’t have time to read it all, but I’ve been following some of it already. Not to brag, but unless the sky falls when and if the debt limit isn’t raised, I will retire in three years before age 50, with the house an car paid for ($300,000 value on home) and with $100,000 in the bank and hopefully the current $350,000 in the 401k will be more like $550,000 in ten years. I hope that pisses some people off. I’ve worked for the same company for 23 years with current salary of $100,000. So @65 post – put a dick in it.
71 – Well done gman – your innumerate commentary about heterosexuality aside.
@71 I don’t think you should retire before age 50 with that asset base, unless you have a pension or plan to have a second career. The 300K house is paid off and that’s a good move, and by the way, about half of America’s millionaires live in homes worth 300K or less.
(Academic research has shown that most people with millionaire lifestyles aren’t millionaires and a majority of America’s millonaires have blue-collar lifestyles; what this proves is that spending money and accumulating money are mutually exclusive for most people, duh.)
The problem is, if you’re only 50, you’re still at least 12 years away from social security and 15 years away from medicare, and you may have 30 or 40 years of inflation ahead of you. If your nest egg is 450k that’ll earn $18,000 a year at 4%. Do you want to live on 18k the rest of your life?
Yeah, turning 350k into 550k in 10 years seems attainable, although it’s not guaranteed, if you consider that we’re likely going to be in a slow-growth economy for years to come. Based on my actual results, if I’d had that 350k in 1985, it would have been $4.5 million by 2005, but I don’t think that performance is repeatable in today’s market conditions. I’m not worth 4.5m because I had much less to work with back in ’85 but I made the most of it. You’ve set yourself a much more modest goal and you probably can achieve it even in a shitty economy.
If you’ve got a 100k job, I’d hang onto that for as long as you can, because once you let go of it, you may never see that income again. There are a couple of exceptions to this. First, if the job is destroying your health or job stress is shortening your life, then quit the damn job as soon as you can! The other exception is, if you have an even better opportunity in front of you by working for yourself, and you feel sufficiently confident of it working out, then promote yourself into being your own boss. For some people, that pays off real big.
But retiring at 50 with only 450k of savings? That might work if you’re planning to sell the house and live on a 20-foot sailboat for the rest of your life. Then you’d have 750k to invest and your only expenses would be 300 bucks a month for marina fees, food, and $100 a year for two gallons of anti-fouling bottom paint. Once you get rid of the house, the cars, the medical insurance, and the other trappings of civilized life and live like a hippie, the $30k you can earn from investing 750k at 4% will go a long way, and your taxes will be next to nuthin’ so you’ll even be able to afford to vote for Democrats.
@71 The debt limit isn’t going to be raised and the sky is going to fall. I feel about 80% certain of this. There’s a small (5%) chance the GOPers will take sanity pills within the next two weeks, and a larger (15%) chance that President Cave-In will roll over, play possum, and cut our social security and medicare so CEOs making $150 million a year can keep their tax cuts.
In which case Obama won’t deserve to be re-elected, and probably won’t be.
I mean, if the guy’s gonna act like a Republican, why not hold your nose and vote for a real Republican?
Hey, did I miss something? Have mathematical laws been changed so that 2 trillion is now larger than 4 trillion?
Rather than 401Ks, cash, or gold, I’ve put all my retirement savings into liquor that ages well. No investment counselor advises such, but, I don’t need to hear their blather. Certain things retain value–always.
@78
I had a great uncle that was a carpenter and a gun collector. He did a bunch of his work off the books for guns rather than cash. He was far from rich, but he did just fine for himself. I’ve still got a couple of his lever-actions from around 1915. Last I checked they were worth about a K a piece.
@72. Thanks!
Good Morning, America!
The July Drama is unfolding pretty much as I expected. Republicans are intransigent; they’re stonewalling and we’re heading straight into the jaws of a Treasury default. Let’s review the status quo:
1. After 30 years of fiscal reality has repeatedly proved that idiotic GOP dogma that “cutting taxes increases revenue) is nonsense, GOPers still insist there can be no backing off the tax cuts and special tax perks given to the uber-rich under Reagan and the Bushes to solve the deficits they created. Moreover, GOPers are resisting any cuts to Pentagon spending, which ballooned from $400b to $700b a year under Dubya. They haven’t budged an inch from their starting position, which is that the federal budget must be balanced entirely on the backs of senior citizens, students, and the poor.
2. Faced with GOP asshats acting in bad faith, President Obama has only two choices, cave in to their outrageous demands or let a Treasury default happen. This is a no-brainer; you don’t make things better by appeasing the Hitlers of the world.
3. It isn’t just on the surface that the budget talks have broken down; they’ve broken down systematically. As MSNBC reports this morning, “‘The whole thing is off the rails,’ said a Democratic official close to the talks.
4. Meanwhile, all the GOP presidential candidates openly campaigning against any compromise, with some going farther and saying the debt limit shouldn’t be raised, period. And their rhetoric, which presumably reflects the mood of the GOP base, is having an effect on congressional Republicans — those who will cast real-life votes on a debt deal:
“Despite the intense effort that Mr. Boehner is putting into structuring a deal that Republicans can support without breaking any no-tax-increase promises, it is clear that many Republicans in the House and Senate will oppose any increase in the debt ceiling no matter what concessions they might win.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43.....debt-deal/
Roger Rabbit Commentary: With the political environment getting more toxic by the day, and given growing signs that congressional Republicans will renege on a debt deal even if Obama agrees to their demands and gets nothing in return, the outcome of this is becoming both clear and inevitable: There is going to be a Treasury default.
Where it goes from there is anyone’s guess. GOPers are now talking themselves into believing it’ll be no big deal. They’re deluding themselves; “the International Monetary Fund’s new chief, Christine Lagarde, said that if the U.S. fails to raise its debt limit, she foresees ‘interest hikes, stock markets taking a huge hit and real nasty consequences’ for the American and global economies.” She’s not the only one; economists across the board are warning of serious consequences.
Some Republican pols may not actually believe the economy will be unscathed. But they’ve painted themselves into a corner. They fired up the Teahadist mobs with incendiary rhetoric, and now their hands are tied — their choice now is to either lose their base or lose the fragile economuc recovery. From a Machiavellian standpoint, their best option probably is to let a disaster happen — and then try to blame it on the Democrats.
As for Obama, he should take a lesson from history: Perhaps the surrender monkeys could
appeased Hitler one more time by looking the other way when he invaded Poland, but what would they have done when he invaded England?
There are times when you’ve got to fight regardless of costs or consequences, and this is one of those times.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43.....ite_house/
The stock market, still not wanting to believe that GOPers are crazy, is reacting to the weekend’s developments rather mildly this morning; the Dow is off only 122 points so far.
The selloff is picking up steam; we’re down 149 points now.
As Republicans seek to slash even bigger holes in the social safety net, it’s worthwhile to remember that government safety-net spending is one of the best depression-fighting tools we have — not only do these programs protect individuals, but they also put a floor under how far the economy can fall.
“An extraordinary amount of personal income is coming directly from the government. Close to $2 of every $10 that went into Americans’ wallets last year were payments like jobless benefits, food stamps, Social Security and disability, according to an analysis by Moody’s Analytics. …
“By the end of this year, however, many of those dollars are going to disappear, with the expiration of extended benefits intended to help people cope with the lingering effects of the recession. …
“Unless hiring picks up sharply to compensate, economists fear that the lost income will further crimp consumer spending and act as a drag on a recovery that is still quite fragile.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43....._business/
Roger Rabbit Commentary: We’re not out of the woods yet. Stupid economic policies could still push us into another Great Depression. And the Hooverites are still very much with us, and trying very hard to accomplish exactly that result.
There are important elections tomorrow — a Democratic House seat in CA-36 is on the ballot tomorrow, as are a half-dozen Wisconsin GOP senators up for recall.
One of the Casey Anthony jurors has been forced to quit her job and leave Florida because she fears for her safety from, among others, her co-workers.
http://fieldnotes.msnbc.msn.co.....hony-juror
Meanwhile, there’s solid evidence that — denials notwithstanding — the Jerry Springer Show did make an offer (through an independent producer) to pay $1 million to Casey Anthony to appear on the show with her estranged relatives … presumably for a chair-throwing bout. Hey, why work at an honest job if you can make a million bucks by beating the rap for killing your own toddler?*
* Just kidding! Anthony did no such thing. The jury said so, and as juries have the final word in such matters, for all legal purposes (including libel) Anthony is INNOCENT. So why NOT pay this poor, innocent, framed woman — who escaped government persecution thanks to an honest jury — a million bucks to tell American TV viewers her tear-jerking story of going through personal hell?
The stock market is still sliding, now down 176 points.
@70
Fuck that…..I would rather be waterboarded.
@89 Maybe Marcus Bachmann could help you with your little problem.
@90
who said its a problem?
you are the only one with a problem it would seem.
90 – Good shot Gman.. It’s never the ignorant, bigoted, gay-baiting assholes who have the problem… Never..
@92
and speaking of circle jerk losers who suck off the state’s tit, YLBleeder chimes in right on schedule…
93 – You’re sooooo sad. You’ve never contributed anything the least bit positive here.
Some novel compromise that leads to smaller government and lower taxes??
Nope. Just name-calling, hatred of people different from you, boasting about your oh so superior economic status and ignorant right wing bleats.
Whatever floats your boat dude. Thanks for making our point.
@94 “Some novel compromise that leads to smaller government and lower taxes??”
How about fewer recreational wars and cutting defense spending back to pre-Bush levels? That’ll save several trillion dollars.
Full Disclosure: Roger Rabbit owns defense stocks and will make less money in the stock market if Congress cuts defense spending — but he thinks they should cut it anyway!!
@94
not to worry YLBleeder, I worked extra long hours today so your family will have heat in the winter.
Just doing my part to support the losers of society to make sure they dont starve to death or freeze over the winter.
good thing you have time to post tens of thousands of posts..lol
@97 did your Dad beat you when you were younger?
@98
Nope
Did your dad diddle you when you were younger? That might explain a few things, dont you think?
@97 Listening to people who don’t pay taxes bitch about the taxes they don’t pay is the funniest show in town.
# 97: You seem to think you are the only one working long hours?
just checking my own schedule over the past seven days:
Thursday 12 hours + 2 hours commute.
Friday 15 hours (incl. business dinner) + 2 hours commute
Saturday 4 hours + 1-1/2 hour commute.
Sunday 16 hours (worked at home, no commute)
Monday 12.5 hours + 2 hour commute
Tuesday 11.45 hours + 2 hour commute.
Also, since I am salaried, I get no overtime, and our company doesn’t give out bonuses to speak of. In the meantime I’m doing my own part to reduce the trade deficit imbalance, exporting high-technolgy products overseas.
It’s always pretty silly when the right wing tries to construct their “straw man”, arguing that liberals don’t work hard or leach off the system. They don’t like having to address facts in their diatribes, it interferes with their preconceived biases.
LMAO! I appreciate your sacrifice for those less fortunate than you. Some of them may be gay even. An invalid AIDS patient maybe..
Our family handles our heating bills just fine thank you very much.